Posted on 05/26/2006 4:33:22 AM PDT by AZRepublican
The current (and past) crop of Congress Critters simply think they are above the law and better than the "little people" like you and me. More and more folks are paying attention. Whether it be illegal immigration, tax reform, the William Jefferson, Democrat-Louisiana, issue, or any of a host of other issues, I sense the outrage building in the electorate to a point I've never experienced in my 43 years.
It is the responsibility of each branch of government to "check and balance" the other two. If the Executive branch has reason to believe the Legislative branch is violating the law, then it has the responsibility to do whatever is necessary to legally check it.
It is the responsibility of each branch of government to "check and balance" the other two. If the Executive branch has reason to believe the Legislative branch is violating the law, then it has the responsibility to do whatever is necessary to legally check it.
Ironically that is the very reason the constitution forbids what the FBI and that judge has done!
There will always be crooks in congress. Therefore any president could look at any papers of a congressman at any time if all he needs is to claim he's looking for evidence of a crime. And of course he could use the informatin on party political plans to his own advantage; use the threat of exposing their log rolling, vote trading and general dirty sausage making business of congress to manipulate the congressmen. The judiciary can get big budget increases form protecting selected congressmen from warrants. What a wonderful country.
The Debate Clause is to protect the Legislature from intimidation from an Executive or Judiciary.
They have no power or right to forcibly seize and examine legitimate legislative papers even in a honest search for evidence. They are forbidden because the consequences are worse.
I know of no state that has any mechanism in place to keep track of who moves in or out, and what their status is.
And a very good thing, too.
>It's been a while since states set rules for naturalization.
Not since the Confederacy. The reason for the naturalization clause was because the several states under the articles of confederation would all have different and conflicting rules. So congress was left with the task of making uniform rules for all the states to follow, but states could and did add their own rules to their own naturalization laws above the bare minimal of what congress established. At one time California tacked on an extra requirement of property wealth to meet naturalzation requirements.
What disdain for our Founders' intelligence there is on these threads.
Nobody is making that stupid claim. That's twice that idiotic strawman argument has been trotted out on this very thread.
In your case at least, JC, I'd expect better.
Nice threadjack.
Oops, joking, btw. I forgot to add that!
Dennis H. is claiming that it was his "evil twin" that spoke out of turn. HE was inside the hallowed walls of Congress, doing "the people's work" the whole time. (/sarcasm)
You seem to be forgetting that any paperwork seized in an investigation that had to do with legitimate "Speech and Debate" would be thrown out in any court and could not be used against the congressman in any way.
Now, a VERY interesting scenario that would have REAL constitutional implications would be:
A congressman admits to bribery on the floor of the house. The house has the ability to expel him, no question there.
But, can the congressman be prosecuted by the executive branch, or by a state, using those statements in any way?
Of course they would.
BUT.. the only way to ensure that they are "not used... in any way" is not to allow them to be seized and examined.
Logically, what Constitutional power does the Executive or Judiciary have to seize and examine something they "can't use in ANY way"?
A better example of the Debate Clause is the case of Tom Delay.
Ronnie Earl takes indictment and goes to a Clinton judge and gets a warrant to search Delay's office for evidence. All perfectly fine/
The judge grants the warrant with the restriction that Ronnie must use some of his men- who aren't connected to the Delay case- to examine all of Delay's papers and only give the ones that aren't privileged to the prosecuting team.
You think the deepest secrets of the Republican Party which were in Delay's office would never be "used in any way" after being examined by the kind of people that workk for Ronnie Earl???
Nothing said or written in legitimate legislative activity can be used against a congressman. Any floor speech is legitimate activity so it's clear that statement could not be used in any judicial procedure.
It was an absurd argument to begin with. If Hastert, Pelosi, et. al, were correct, the a corrupt member of Congress could use the Constitution as a shield to hide evidence any illegal activity; bribery, murder, rape, etc. Just keep all the evidence in your Congressional office and no one could find it. Makes no sense.
I have shamelessly stolen the following from a post on another thread by "Lepton", and I believe that it CLEARLY shows that appropriate safeguards were in place to prevent ANY breach of Constitutional powers, while safeguarding the basic principle of checks and balances. The executive branch secured a proper warrant from the judicial branch upon showing probable cause AND providing appropriate procedural safeguards. Without that, the Congressman could be stacking bodies in a freezer in his office with complete impunity.
From a Byron York piece:
Then the warrant describes a set of extraordinary procedures involving not only prosecutors but also the Court, by which Congressional privileges will be respected:
To ensure the prosecution team does not inadvertently review any potentially politically sensitive, non-responsive items in the office, or information that may fall within the purview of the Speech or Debate Clause privilege, or any other pertinent privilege, the physical search of the office will be conducted by special agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation who have had no substantive role in the investigation.
The non-case agents will remove from the office those paper records determined to be responsive [to a detailed list of things to be search for included at the end of the warrant request]…Other than as required to determine responsiveness, the non-case agents will not disclose to anyone any politically sensitive and non-responsive items inadvertently seen by the non-case agents during the course of the search of the office and will attest in writing to their compliance with this procedure.
Before giving any paper records seized from the office to the prosecution team, the non-case agents will deliver the seized paper records to the designated Filter Team….Prior to their appointment, the Filter Team will have had no role or connection to the investigation in this matter and their subsequent roles in the investigation will be confined to their duties and responsibilities in connection with these special procedures.
The Filter Team will review the paper records seized from the office to validate that they are responsive…Any paper records seized from the office that are determined by the Filter Team to be unresponsive…will be promptly returned to the office…
Paper records validated by the Filter Team as responsive… will undergo a second level of review by the Filter Team. The Filter Team will review the responsive records to determine if they may fall within the purview of the Speech or Debate Clause privilege or any other pertinent privilege…
For those paper records determined by the Filter Team as potentially within the purview of the Speech or Debate Clause privilege, or any other pertinent privilege, the Filter Team shall provide a log of those potentially privileged paper records to counsel for Congressman Jefferson. The log shall identify the record by date, recipient, sender and subject matter….The Filter Team shall not provide the log or copies of the potentially privileged paper records to the prosecution team, unless otherwise ordered by the Court…
The Filter Team shall then request the District Court to review the potentially privileged paper records in order for the Court to name a final determination whether they contain privileged information, unless counsel for Congressman Jefferson consents to the production to the prosecution team of certain of the potentially privileged paper records.
(posted on 05/24/2006 5:19:53 PM CDT by lepton)
You're right. Denny got his tit in a wringer and Bush is doing his best to help Denny get it out without losing too much face.
Ronnie Earl takes indictment and goes to a Clinton judge and gets a warrant to search Delay's office for evidence. All perfectly fine/
The judge grants the warrant with the restriction that Ronnie must use some of his men- who aren't connected to the Delay case- to examine all of Delay's papers and only give the ones that aren't privileged to the prosecuting team.
You think the deepest secrets of the Republican Party which were in Delay's office would never be "used in any way" after being examined by the kind of people that workk for Ronnie Earl???
The filter team idea doesn't work in a Debate Clause situation.
It's fine for other "privileges" and I'm sure it was used with good intent.
I sure hope it keeps building to a point where the public does something about it. I know I am ready to march.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.